Search Results

BILL: SB 646 TITLE: Local Education Agencies - Educator Screening - Educator Identification ClearingSenate (School Personnel Vetting and Hiring Transparency Act) DATE: March 04, 2026 POSITION: Support with Amendments COMMITTEE: Senate Education, Energy & the Environment Committee CONTACT: Mary Pat Fannon, Executive Director, PSSAM The Public School Superintendents’ Association of Maryland (PSSAM), on behalf of all twenty-four local school superintendents, supports Senate Bill 646 with amendments. This bill requires the Maryland State Department of Education (MSDE) to register each local school system (LSS) in the State as an associate member of a national membership organization that provides access to the Educator Identification ClearingSenate and to pay any applicable fees and dues associated with the membership. Each LSS must use the clearinghouse to screen individuals who receive an offer of employment for an educator position that requires a license. In addition, each local school system must ensure that each individual who receives such an offer (1) applies for the appropriate license after the offer of employment and before the start of employment and (2) obtains the appropriate license before any interaction with children. Nothing in the bill may be construed to impair or affect existing statutory prohibitions against hiring or retaining individuals convicted of specified crimes, including child sexual abuse. Maryland school systems take their responsibility to ensure the safety of students and staff extremely seriously. We appreciate the bill’s emphasis on strengthening student safety and reinforcing the integrity of the licensure process. In particular, we support the provision requiring candidates to apply for licensure at the time they receive an offer of employment. This requirement adds an important layer of screening and reinforces the shared commitment of school systems and the State to student protection. A review of Maryland’s 24 local school systems confirms that extensive safeguards are already in place, including existing federal and state mandates, such as: State and FBI fingerprinting (criminal background checks and the Adam Walsh Background Clearance Request form, DHR/SSA 1279A) Form I-9 verification (paper and E-Verify where available) Md. Code, Educ. § 6-113.2 Child Sexual Abuse and Sexual Misconduct review (“HB 486 review”) Maryland State Department of Education (MSDE) TEACH database review Maryland CJIS database (fingerprinting and background checks) The FBI’s Next Generation Identification (NGI) Rap Back Service  MSDE Disqualified Substitute List review Department of Social Services child abuse registry checks Maryland Judiciary Case Search inquiries, where applicable Internal database reviews Drug testing, where required Recruiting and tracking systems such as Workday, AppliTrack (Unified Talent/PowerSchool), TalentEd (PowerSchool), and Frontline Basic online screening and employment verification processes These layers of review reflect a strong and proactive screening infrastructure across the State. While we support the bill’s intent, we respectfully request a clarifying amendment to remove the language requiring a license to be fully issued before “any interaction with students.”  Although well-intentioned, this provision could unintentionally create barriers for pre-screened, qualified educators whose paperwork is still being processed. In practice, licensure issuance can be delayed for reasons outside of a candidate’s control even when all safety screenings have been successfully completed. Removing this final clause, while retaining the requirement that candidates apply for licensure upon offer of employment, preserves the bill’s important safety objectives while allowing reasonable operational flexibility during the hiring and licensure process. Finally, we support an amendment to move the date from October 1, 2026 to August 1, 2026 by which local school systems must utilize the clearinghouse to screen individuals offered employment.  Senate Bill 646 builds upon current protections aimed at ensuring only qualified and appropriate individuals enter our classrooms. We strongly support the bill’s focus on student safety and maintaining the credibility of the licensure system. Therefore, PSSAM supports Senate Bill 646 with the  amendments outlined above.

BILL: SB 592 TITLE: State Board of Education - Financial Literacy - Graduation Requirement DATE: March 04, 2026 POSITION: Unfavorable COMMITTEE: Senate Education, Energy & the Environment Committee CONTACT: Mary Pat Fannon, Executive Director, PSSAM The Public School Superintendents’ Association of Maryland (PSSAM), on behalf of all twenty-four public school superintendents, opposes  Senate Bill 592. This bill requires students, beginning with a specified graduating class, to successfully complete a personal financial literacy course. The bill also requires county boards to award credit upon successful completion and to allow students to satisfy certain remaining credit requirements through existing coursework. In effect, the legislation codifies financial literacy as a standalone graduation requirement under State law. This act shall take effect July 1, 2026 beginning with the graduating class of 2030.  PSSAM recognizes the importance of financial literacy and acknowledges that financial literacy concepts are already taught in grades 3-12 across Maryland’s public schools. The issue before the Committee is not the value of financial literacy, but the mechanism by which it is required. Graduation requirements have historically been determined through a balance of state standards and local decision-making, allowing school systems to align requirements with community priorities, staffing capacity, and student pathways. Codifying a semester-long financial literacy course as a standalone graduation requirement reduces that flexibility and may require adjustments to existing credit structures, potentially displacing other locally valued courses or student electives. Maryland currently requires 22 state-mandated credits across specific subject areas, leaving limited space within a student’s four-year schedule for local priorities and emerging instructional needs. While financial literacy may be a priority today, areas where students require growth and emphasis will continue to evolve. Local education agencies need flexibility to adjust credit structures as workforce demands, higher education expectations, and student needs evolve, without having those decisions fixed in statute. When instructional priorities are embedded in law, modification requires legislative repeal or amendment, significantly slowing a school system’s ability to respond compared to local policy revision.                                                                                    Given the need for school systems to design adaptable graduation pathways, PSSAM opposes Senate Bill 592 and respectfully requests an unfavorable  committee report.

BILL: SB 685 TITLE: Local School Systems - Sexual Abuse and Sexual Misconduct - Response Policy and After-Action Review DATE: March 04, 2026 POSITION: Letter of Information COMMITTEE: Senate Education, Energy & the Environment Committee CONTACT: Mary Pat Fannon, Executive Director, PSSAM The Public School Superintendents’ Association of Maryland (PSSAM), on behalf of all twenty-four local school superintendents, provides this letter of information on Senate Bill 685   as we continue to discuss amendments with the sponsor.  This bill requires the State Department of Education to develop a model sexual abuse and sexual misconduct response policy that includes certain minimal components; requires each local school system to adopt a response policy and provide notices in a certain manner, and conduct an after–action in under certain circumstances; and generally relates to sexual abuse and sexual misconduct response policies. PSSAM appreciates the intent of this bill and the sponsor’s work on ensuring that students and families navigating trauma receive compassionate support, timely resources, and clear, responsive communication. We believe that effective communication with communities is essential to fostering safe, supportive learning environments.  As currently drafted, SB 685 would: Require the Maryland State Department of Education to develop a model sexual abuse and misconduct response policy that includes expanded public communication requirements and enhanced document retention standards; Require local school systems to adopt policies aligned with MSDE’s model ; Mandate that school systems establish a website  providing updates regarding pending misconduct investigations; and Require after-action reviews  following serious incidents to assess response, communication, and coordination with investigators. We share the goal of ensuring students are supported when serious events occur. However, as currently drafted, SB 685 creates significant statutory, operational, and due process concerns for local school systems. Below are some of our concerns with the bill as drafted:  Disruption of Maryland’s Mandatory Reporting Framework Maryland has a long-standing, carefully structured statutory framework governing child abuse reporting and investigation. All school personnel are mandated reporters and reports of suspected abuse are made to Child Protective Services (CPS) within the Department of Social Services (DSS). CPS is responsible for screening reports, determining investigative status, managing the timing and manner of parental notification, and protecting investigative integrity and confidentiality. SB 685 would, in certain circumstances, shift responsibility for incident notification from DSS to local school systems. This represents a significant departure from Maryland’s statutory structure, which intentionally separates the act of reporting (school personnel) and the act of investigating and notifying (CPS). Requiring school systems to independently notify families of newly defined “credible allegations” risks interfering with active or potential investigations and compromising student safety in sensitive situations. This separation exists for a reason: it protects children, preserves investigative integrity, and safeguards due process. In addition, the bill introduces new terms and Undefined Legal Standards— including: “Credible allegation” “Serious incident” These terms do not currently exist in Maryland statutory construction in this context and lack clear legal standards or definitions. Without established definitions, school systems may be required to act before professional screening occurs and notification could occur in cases that are later screened out. More importantly reputations may be harmed before facts are evaluated and community alarm may be triggered unnecessarily. School staff frequently report out of an abundance of caution. Many reports are screened out by CPS. If every report automatically triggers immediate notification, it may unintentionally discourage reporting in ambiguous situations — undermining the very child protection goals we all share. It is essential that staff continue to report concerns without fear that a precautionary report will result in immediate reputational consequences before facts are reviewed. Community Notification Mandates The bill requires communication plans that specify what information must be shared publicly at each stage of the response process. Automatic public notification of allegations, regardless of investigative status, may compromise confidentiality and escalate situations prematurely. Most importantly, this would affect employee due process rights. Maryland’s current framework allows CPS to determine appropriate timing and scope of notification. A more targeted approach could achieve the bill’s goals without altering the core structure of mandatory reporting law. Many investigations into allegations are ultimately unsubstantiated. In practice, public disclosure alone can effectively end a career in that community. New Record Retention Requirements We understand alternative language may be under consideration. Generally, PSSAM is cautious about mandated retention frameworks that create local fiscal burdens and require long-term digital storage infrastructure and compliance monitoring. There may also be conflict with existing local or State retention schedules. Retention frameworks should be grounded in sound records management principles, privacy protections, and operational feasibility, not in the hope of retroactively identifying wrongdoing through routine educational records. Website Posting Requirements The bill requires that each local school system create a time-stamped webpage that confirms the nature of an alleged incident and provides status updates on an ongoing investigation. Requiring public confirmation and ongoing updates risks compromising due process, mischaracterizing allegations as findings, and creating an unworkable compliance standard. We appreciate the intent to ensure transparency and access to resources. However, we believe a more effective and equitable approach would be to require: Standing crisis resource pages Easily accessible trauma-response supports Information for families, students, and staff across all  crisis scenarios Trauma is trauma. Resources should be available for any event that overwhelms a school community — not limited to a single category of misconduct. After-Action Reviews Reviewing serious incidents to strengthen systems and improve future responses is a constructive goal. However, requiring an after-action review in every instance of staff removal may produce unintended consequences. In many situations, established protocols work as designed: a concern is reported, the employee is removed, authorities investigate, and appropriate action follows. Automatically triggering a secondary review each time could create unnecessary second-guessing of frontline decisions or unintentionally shift focus in ways that risk victim or bystander blame. It is also important to recognize that these matters often involve multiple independent entities, including child protective services and law enforcement. Their investigations are confidential and occur outside the school system’s authority. When those agencies identify deficiencies in reporting or safety practices, they already issue findings and recommendations. Any after-action requirement should therefore be carefully structured to reinforce system improvement without compromising the confidentiality, integrity, or independence of those investigative processes. We believe the goals of SB 685 can be accomplished in a clearer and more efficient manner — by refining Maryland’s existing statutory framework under Md. Code Ann., Educ. Art. § 7-1501 et seq. (Maryland Safe to Learn Act) Many provisions of SB 685 could dovetail with the Safe to Learn Act’s existing requirements for school emergency planning and crisis response. Rather than creating a parallel system, we recommend strengthening the existing one. For instance, expanding the definition of “School Emergency Plan” and strengthening communication requirements within the existing law.  PSSAM strongly supports ensuring that students and families receive timely support, clear communication, and appropriate resources during times of crisis. However, we believe the most effective and efficient way to realize the bill’s goals is to refine and expand the existing Safe to Learn Act rather than alter Maryland’s mandatory reporting framework or create parallel notification mandates. We welcome continued dialogue with the sponsor and stakeholders and would be pleased to assist in drafting amendments that protect students, support families, preserve due process, maintain investigative integrity, and provide clear and practical guidance to local school systems. We appreciate the ongoing collaboration and look forward to working together toward a solution that achieves these shared goals. PSSAM appreciates the opportunity to provide this letter of information  on SB 685 and welcomes continued discussion with the sponsor and the committee.

BILL: SB 712 TITLE: Primary and Secondary Education - Funding Accuracy and Full-Time Equivalent Enrollment Count - Alterations and Report (Education Funding Accuracy Act) DATE: March 03, 2026 POSITION: Unfavorable COMMITTEE: Senate Education, Energy & the Environment Committee Senate Budget & Taxation Committee CONTACT: Mary Pat Fannon, Executive Director, PSSAM The Public School Superintendents’ Association of Maryland (PSSAM), on behalf of all twenty-four local school superintendents, opposes  Senate Bill 712.  This bill alters the definition of full-time equivalent (FTE) enrollment that is used to calculate State education aid and local government education funding requirements to include the average number of students enrolled on September 30th, and May 31st of the prior school year instead of only the September 30 count from the prior year used under current law. The bill takes effect July 1, 2026, and is applicable to the calculation of education funding for fiscal 2028 and subsequent fiscal years. PSSAM opposes Senate Bill 712 and advocates for maintaining the current methodology for counting students enrolled in public schools on September 30th to determine state and local aid amounts for the following fiscal year.  PSSAM cautions that this calculation change would present a number of challenges for local school systems. Most alarmingly, it would delay the final State and county funding appropriations until after the prior school year is over, complicating the implementation of the next school year’s budget. Additionally, this methodology would create an unstable and unpredictable amount of funding in the middle of a fiscal year if a school system were to lose student enrollment during the school year. Education funding is designed to support student needs, not to operate as an attendance enforcement mechanism. Conflating attendance accountability with funding calculations risks misaligning the purpose of state aid formulas. This legislation provides no meaningful, or positive mechanism to promote school attendance, instead it uses the threat of losing funding as a means to incentive change - a dubious public policy when it comes to ensuring a free and appropriate public education to Maryland’s school children.  Based on the analysis of similar past proposals, this bill would more than likely reduce the state’s investment in public education, disproportionately impacting jurisdictions with higher student absenteeism rates. Local school systems prioritize regular student attendance and invest heavily in programs aimed at preventing, reducing, and addressing chronic absenteeism. However, Senate Bill 712 ties state funding reductions to absenteeism rates—the very challenge that school systems are mandated to combat with additional resources. As a result, districts with higher absenteeism throughout the school year would face the greatest funding losses due to lower enrollment counts recorded later in the year. Once again, local superintendents take the issue of student attendance very seriously and work diligently to ensure that every student attends school regularly. However, PSSAM believes this approach risks undermining efforts to improve student attendance by limiting the resources schools rely on to address absenteeism. For these reasons, PSSAM opposes  Senate Bill 712 and kindly requests an unfavorable  report.

BILL: SB 284 TITLE: Budget Reconciliation and Financing Act of 2026 DATE: March 04, 2026 POSITION: Support with Amendments COMMITTEE: Senate Education, Energy & the Environment Committee CONTACT: Mary Pat Fannon, Executive Director, PSSAM The Public School Superintendents’ Association of Maryland (PSSAM), on behalf of all twenty-four local school superintendents, supports Senate Bill 284 with amendments. This omnibus legislation alters or repeals certain appropriations; authorizes the use of certain funds and revenues for certain purposes and distribution; alters eligibility for various programs; provides modifications to federal adjusted gross income of an individual or federal taxable income of a corporation for Maryland income tax purposes relating to certain depreciation deductions; etc. On behalf of Maryland’s 24 local superintendents, responsible for nearly 900,000 students and their families, we appreciate the difficult fiscal environment and the choices ahead as you craft the FY 2027 budget. In your deliberations we ask you to consider three amendments to the BRFA to help preserve education funding for Maryland students. These requests all affect hold-harmless provisions in the State budget.  (1) A hold-harmless for districts who experienced a decline in multilingual learners and (2) students experiencing poverty. This provision would ensure that no school system receives less compensatory funding than was provided in FY ‘26, approximately $41 million in State funding. To sustain the State’s previous funding for multilingual learners, it would require approximately $12.5 million; both of these BRFA actions would require a supplemental budget appropriation.  (3) We are requesting a permanent hold harmless for schools and districts participating in the Community Eligibility Program (CEP).  We applaud Governor Moore’s budget that reflects this for the FY ‘27 budget, and AIB’s request to extend this for two years. However, we believe the most appropriate action is to make the hold harmless permanent until a new statewide poverty measure is adopted. This proposal maintains stability until the required analysis to establish a new poverty measure is complete. Both of these requests are consistent with our November 25, 2025 letter to the Governor requesting his support as school systems face enrollment fluctuations. Complicating our enrollment declines is the absence of the revised methodology for counting students in poverty. As this committee is aware, the statutory language in 5-222, crafted during the passage of the Blueprint legislation, changed the formula for how districts count poverty. This language was changed in anticipation of a new methodology to be established by FY ‘27, along with an alternative form created by MSDE. This was to be informed by a study and broad consultation with stakeholders; that work is not complete and a new methodology has yet to be created.  In the absence of a reliable statewide poverty measure, districts face significant uncertainty. CEP calculations alone do not capture a complete picture of poverty, yet compensatory education funding remains heavily dependent on those counts. A refined statewide methodology is crucial to ensuring that funding is distributed in a way that achieves true equity under the Blueprint. The Impact of Enrollment on Student Funding and Maryland’s Previous Use of Hold-Harmless Provisions Following national trends, Maryland’s public school enrollment has softened due to lower birth rates, slower reentry from pandemic homeschooling and private school placements, and federal immigration dynamics. In Maryland, enrollment declines are uneven across districts and sometimes concentrated in specific schools. In addition, the impacts of the federal changes to SNAP and Medicaid eligibility enacted in the OBBA/HR 1 are almost certainly going to negatively impact enrollment of students and families living in poverty. Small enrollment changes can produce outsized funding swings, even as fixed costs are rising and outpacing inflation, including utilities and transportation.  Holding enrollment or aggregate funding at the district level “harmless” has been embraced by previous Maryland  leaders. In 2021, the General Assembly removed the September 2020 count from the three-year rolling average, and in 2023 they provided similar relief when faced with a precipitous decline in compensatory education enrollment - both measures aimed to hedge pandemic anomalies from driving formula losses. We ask for similar hold-harmless provisions to anchor school funding while trends normalize . Therefore, PSSAM supports Senate Bill 284 and kindly requests the committee’s consideration of the  amendments outlined above.

BILL: HB 1046 TITLE: School and School-Sponsored Activities - Report of Suspected Abuse or Neglect - Parental Notification DATE: March 04, 2026 POSITION: Letter of Information COMMITTEE: House Ways & Means Committee CONTACT: Mary Pat Fannon, Executive Director, PSSAM The Public School Superintendents’ Association of Maryland (PSSAM), on behalf of all twenty-four public school superintendents, provides this letter of information regarding House Bill 1046. This legislation requires a school to provide notice to the parent, guardian, or caretaker of a child if a mandated reporter reports suspected abuse or neglect that occurs at a school or school-sponsored activity, unless the parent, guardian, or caretaker is the subject of the report; and requires the notice to be provided not later than 24 hours after the report is made. PSSAM shares the goal of ensuring safe, supportive learning environments for all students and recognizes the importance of clear communication with families. We offer the following information for the committee’s consideration. Under Maryland law, all school personnel are mandated reporters of suspected child abuse or neglect and take this legal responsibility extremely seriously.  Mandatory reporting requirements are well established in State law and are consistently reinforced through school system policies, procedures, and training. This legislation would shift, in certain circumstances, the responsibility for notifying a parent, guardian, or caretaker from the Department of Social Services (DSS) to local education agencies (LEAs). This represents a significant departure from Maryland’s longstanding statutory framework, which intentionally separates the act of reporting from the responsibilities of investigation and notification. The bill is also unclear on what information is to be reported to the parent. The bill says “THE SCHOOL STAFF SHALL PROVIDE NOTICE OF THE REPORT….” but does not specify what should be included in the “notice.” Providing notice that a report has been made without any details of the specific allegations, and without any facts or investigative findings is especially troublesome.  C urrently, Child Protective Services (CPS), within DSS, is responsible for assessing safety risks, determining whether an investigation is warranted, and managing the timing and manner of parental notification. This process includes appropriate privacy protections for all parties involved and ensures that investigative integrity and student safety remain paramount. Requiring school systems to independently notify families within a specified timeframe - such as 24 hours - could interfere with active or potential investigations, increase risks to students in sensitive situations, expose school systems to additional liability, and blur the clear lines of authority between reporters and investigators. Shortening the notification timeline or shifting the responsibility for parent notification to the school system may have unintended consequences.  If school personnel understand that every report, including those made out of an abundance of caution, will automatically result in immediate parent notification, it could discourage reporting in situations where facts are unclear or ambiguous. School staff regularly make mandated reports in circumstances that require professional assessment, even when the information available is preliminary or inconclusive. Many such reports are ultimately screened out and determined not to meet Child Protective Services (CPS) criteria for investigation. If parental notification occurs prior to that screening determination, it could inadvertently harm reputations, escalate situations unnecessarily, or create confusion, even when the conduct in question is later found to be appropriate or contextual. It is essential that staff continue to report concerns whenever something warrants professional review, without fear that a precautionary report will automatically result in reputational consequences before the facts are evaluated. The existing framework in which CPS conducts screening and manages the timing and manner of notification helps maintain both student safety and appropriate due process protections. We understand that the legislation may be intended to address situations in which CPS declines to initiate an investigation and a matter is handled through local school system procedures. However, the proposed approach extends well beyond that circumstance and may unintentionally disrupt the balance between reporting protocols and investigative processes. Local policies can, and do, address such scenarios in a manner that preserves appropriate due process protections for individuals subject to internal review, while maintaining transparency with families when appropriate. Mandating parental notification in all reported cases, regardless of investigative status, may create unnecessary alarm, compromise confidentiality, and affect employee due process rights. A more targeted approach may better address the concerns identified without altering the core structure of Maryland’s mandatory reporting framework. PSSAM appreciates the opportunity to provide this letter of information  on HB 1046 and welcomes continued discussion to ensure that any changes strengthen student safety while preserving the integrity of existing child protection processes.

BILL: HB 1323 TITLE: Education - Public Schools - Asian American History Curriculum Requirement DATE: March 05, 2026 POSITION: Unfavorable COMMITTEE: House Ways & Means Committees CONTACT: Mary Pat Fannon, Executive Director, PSSAM The Public School Superintendents’ Association of Maryland (PSSAM), on behalf of all twenty-four public school superintendents, opposes House Bill 1323. House Bill 1323 would require the Maryland State Board of Education (MSDE) to develop curriculum content standards for a unit of instruction on Asian American history in public schools in the State. Furthermore, this bill would require each county board of education to implement the developed Asian American history curriculum content standards beginning in the 2026-2027 school year, as well as ensure that a unit of instruction on Asian American history would be taught at least once during elementary school, once in a required history course in middle school, and once in a history course required to graduate from high school. This act shall take effect July 1, 2025. Local superintendents recognize the importance of teaching culturally relevant and diverse curricula for Maryland’s students. However, PSSAM has a longstanding policy of resisting efforts by the General Assembly to codify curriculum standards, assessments, or graduation requirements. Local superintendents strongly believe that the role of instructional mandates and implementation belongs to local boards of education in conjunction with MSDE. Rest assured, PSSAM’s opposition to this bill is not an evaluation of the merits of teaching Asian American history, but rather opposition to statutorily mandating content standards and additions to curriculum. The Maryland General Assembly, in creating the MSDE and local boards of education, has delegated to these entities the responsibility of delivering a high-quality statewide system of public education. The State Board establishes State content frameworks, state assessment standards, and minimum state graduation requirements, while each local board and school system implements locally-developed curriculum to ensure that the state content frameworks are followed, student performance standards are met, and students are prepared to meet graduation requirements. In the context of educational programming proposed by House Bill 1323, PSSAM emphasizes that many local school systems already incorporate age-appropriate units of instruction on topics such as Asian American history into a comprehensive social studies curriculum. Superintendents are committed to providing students with a comprehensive, well-rounded education through history curriculum that is implemented after proper stakeholder input and review processes are completed in each local school system.  For these reasons, PSSAM opposes House Bill 1323 and kindly requests an unfavorable  report.

BILL: HB 1043 TITLE: Homeschool Students in Maryland - Right to Play DATE: March 04, 2026 POSITION: Unfavorable COMMITTEE: House Ways & Means Committees CONTACT: Mary Pat Fannon, Executive Director, PSSAM The Public School Superintendents’ Association of Maryland (PSSAM), on behalf of all twenty-four local school superintendents, opposes  House Bill 1043. This bill authorizes a public high school to allow a student participating in a certain home instruction program to participate in athletic activities including interscholastic athletics in which a student may participate outside of regular school hours and for which a student does not earn academic credit. It also requires a public high school to give placement priority to a student enrolled in a certain high school over a student who is not enrolled in the school if there are a limited number of spaces available for students in the extracurricular activity.   PSSAM opposes this bill’s expanded eligibility of students participating in public school interscholastic events. State regulations require students to be officially enrolled in and attending a public school. However, students who are homeschooled would not be held to the same eligibility criteria, as homeschool academic and attendance standards differ from those of public schools. Additionally, in the event of injuries or other incidents, public school students would be covered under existing policies, whereas homeschooled students would not have the same protections. This legislation could create significant challenges related to school system liability, increased demands on staff, and disruptions to enrolled students.  Our opposition is consistent with the policies and procedures supported by the Maryland Public Secondary Schools Athletic Association (MPSSAA) who oversee Maryland’s interscholastic sports.  Interscholastic sports throughout Maryland’s public schools are managed based on standards set by the MPSSAA and regulations established by the State Board of Education. Since 1991, these sports have been governed by the "Master Agreement Outlining the Interscholastic Structure for Public Schools in Maryland," which defines the roles of the MPSSAA, the Maryland State Department of Education (MSDE), and local school systems.  For these reasons, PSSAM opposes  House Bill 1043 and kindly requests an unfavorable report.

BILL: HB 961 TITLE: Public Schools and Youth Sports Programs – Concussion Protocol – Alterations DATE: March 04, 2026 POSITION: Letter of Information COMMITTEE: House Ways & Means Committee CONTACT: Mary Pat Fannon, Executive Director, PSSAM The Public School Superintendents’ Association of Maryland (PSSAM), on behalf of all twenty-four public school superintendents, provides this letter of information regarding House Bill 961. This legislation requires the State Department of Education to include athletic officials in policies and programs to provide awareness on concussion protocol for public school and youth sports programs; establishes that certain individuals may remove a student from play and prevent a student from returning to play under certain circumstances; and authorizes a person to bring an action for declaratory relief to enforce certain provisions of law. Local superintendents place the highest priority on protecting our students - on and off the field. We fully recognize the seriousness of concussions and traumatic brain injuries and the critical importance of safeguarding student-athletes in interscholastic sports. For background, since 1991, interscholastic athletics in Maryland have operated under the Master Agreement Outlining the Interscholastic Structure for Public Schools in Maryland, which defines the roles and responsibilities of the Maryland Public Secondary Schools Athletic Association (MPSSAA), the Maryland State Department of Education (MSDE), and local school systems. Superintendents believe this long-standing framework of oversight and collaboration has functioned effectively to protect student safety. MPSSAA’s concussion management policies are developed in consultation with its Medical Advisory Committee and informed by the Brain Injury Task Force. These policies establish clear, medically grounded protocols that reflect current research and best practices. A key strength of this structure is its ability to respond quickly to evolving medical guidance and implement changes efficiently in the field. We are concerned that the proposed legislation could unintentionally disrupt this evidence-based relationship and Maryland’s well-established standard of care. The bill designates officials as an additional party responsible for removing student-athletes for suspected concussion. We are concerned about this approach for several reasons: Officials are independent contractors, not local school system employees, and are not typically trained medical personnel. Current MPSSAA protocols already require that trained individuals be present at athletic events to assess suspected concussions, document findings in writing, and initiate parent or guardian notification. Documentation is then shared with a licensed health care provider or emergency department for further evaluation. For officials, expanding their removal authority could increase their liability exposure if a student is not removed but should have been; independent contractors are not covered by LEA’s liability coverage in these situations.  Introducing officials as a removal authority could create ambiguity regarding who holds primary medical decision-making responsibility, particularly when other personnel are present who are responsible for making medical decisions during gameplan. We share MPSSAA’s concern regarding its capacity to provide the required additional training to officials statewide. Ensuring consistent, medically appropriate training across a large contractor workforce presents logistical and operational challenges. We believe the well-established existing training for coaches and other school personnel is the most appropriate protocol.  The bill could also create unintended situations in which a student-athlete is removed based on subjective judgment rather than medical evaluation. While the likelihood of misuse is small, the framework could limit MPSSAA’s or a local school system’s ability to address situations where removal decisions are driven by competitive considerations rather than established concussion protocols. Maryland’s current concussion management system is built on collaboration between educational leaders and medical experts and has evolved over decades to reflect best practices in student safety. PSSAM appreciates the committee’s focus on protecting student-athletes and respectfully offers these concerns to ensure that any statutory changes strengthen - rather than inadvertently complicate -  Maryland’s well-established concussion management framework. PSSAM is pleased to provide this letter of information regarding House Bill 961 and urges the committee’s thoughtful consideration of the concerns presented above.on, and careful refinement before enacting permanent changes of this magnitude.

BILL: HB 392 TITLE: Budget Reconciliation and Financing Act of 2026 DATE: March 05, 2026 POSITION: Support with Amendments COMMITTEE: House Appropriations Committee CONTACT: Mary Pat Fannon, Executive Director, PSSAM The Public School Superintendents’ Association of Maryland (PSSAM), on behalf of all twenty-four local school superintendents, supports House Bill 392 with amendments. This omnibus legislation alters or repeals certain appropriations; authorizes the use of certain funds and revenues for certain purposes and distribution; alters eligibility for various programs; provides modifications to federal adjusted gross income of an individual or federal taxable income of a corporation for Maryland income tax purposes relating to certain depreciation deductions; etc. On behalf of Maryland’s 24 local superintendents, responsible for nearly 900,000 students and their families, we appreciate the difficult fiscal environment and the choices ahead as you craft the FY 2027 budget. In your deliberations we ask you to consider three amendments to the BRFA to help preserve education funding for Maryland students. These requests all affect hold-harmless provisions in the State budget.  (1) A hold-harmless for districts who experienced a decline in multilingual learners and (2) students experiencing poverty. This provision would ensure that no school system receives less compensatory funding than was provided in FY ‘26, approximately $41 million in State funding. To sustain the State’s previous funding for multilingual learners, it would require approximately $12.5 million; both of these BRFA actions would require a supplemental budget appropriation.  (3) We are requesting a permanent hold harmless for schools and districts participating in the Community Eligibility Program (CEP).  We applaud Governor Moore’s budget that reflects this for the FY ‘27 budget, and AIB’s request to extend this for two years. However, we believe the most appropriate action is to make the hold harmless permanent until a new statewide poverty measure is adopted. This proposal maintains stability until the required analysis to establish a new poverty measure is complete. Both of these requests are consistent with our November 25, 2025 letter to the Governor requesting his support as school systems face enrollment fluctuations. Complicating our enrollment declines is the absence of the revised methodology for counting students in poverty. As this committee is aware, the statutory language in 5-222, crafted during the passage of the Blueprint legislation, changed the formula for how districts count poverty. This language was changed in anticipation of a new methodology to be established by FY ‘27, along with an alternative form created by MSDE. This was to be informed by a study and broad consultation with stakeholders; that work is not complete and a new methodology has yet to be created.  In the absence of a reliable statewide poverty measure, districts face significant uncertainty. CEP calculations alone do not capture a complete picture of poverty, yet compensatory education funding remains heavily dependent on those counts. A refined statewide methodology is crucial to ensuring that funding is distributed in a way that achieves true equity under the Blueprint. The Impact of Enrollment on Student Funding and Maryland’s Previous Use of Hold-Harmless Provisions Following national trends, Maryland’s public school enrollment has softened due to lower birth rates, slower reentry from pandemic homeschooling and private school placements, and federal immigration dynamics. In Maryland, enrollment declines are uneven across districts and sometimes concentrated in specific schools. In addition, the impacts of the federal changes to SNAP and Medicaid eligibility enacted in the OBBA/HR 1 are almost certainly going to negatively impact enrollment of students and families living in poverty. Small enrollment changes can produce outsized funding swings, even as fixed costs are rising and outpacing inflation, including utilities and transportation.  Holding enrollment or aggregate funding at the district level “harmless” has been embraced by previous Maryland  leaders. In 2021, the General Assembly removed the September 2020 count from the three-year rolling average, and in 2023 they provided similar relief when faced with a precipitous decline in compensatory education enrollment - both measures aimed to hedge pandemic anomalies from driving formula losses. We ask for similar hold-harmless provisions to anchor school funding while trends normalize . Therefore, PSSAM supports House Bill 392 and kindly requests the committee’s consideration of the  amendments outlined above.

March 05, 2026 On March 2, Maryland's First Lady Dawn Moore officially launched #ReadMoreMaryland , a statewide literacy month campaign designed to celebrate and strengthen a culture of reading across our state. In partnership with the Governor’s Office of Children and the Maryland State Department of Education, this initiative invites students, families, educators, and community members to come together around one simple but powerful idea: reading matters. Throughout the month, Marylanders are encouraged to share photos or videos of themselves reading their favorite books using #ReadMoreMaryland . Whether it’s a student diving into a new adventure, a family reading together at home, or a classroom celebrating story time, every post helps amplify the joy and importance of literacy. By participating, we can help create a visible, statewide culture of reading that supports Maryland’s young people and reinforces literacy as the foundation for lifelong success. We appreciate your partnership in spreading the word and encouraging your communities to join the movement. Together, let’s show Maryland what it means to read more! Read more in the official press release .

BILL: SB 586 TITLE: Community Eligibility Provision Expansion Program – Establishment DATE: February 25, 2026 POSITION: Favorable COMMITTEE: Senate Education, Energy & the Environment Committee Senate Budget & Taxation Committee CONTACT: Mary Pat Fannon, Executive Director, PSSAM The Public School Superintendents’ Association of Maryland (PSSAM), on behalf of all twenty-four Maryland local school superintendents, supports  Senate Bill 586. This legislation establishes the Community Eligibility Provision Expansion Program in the State Department of Education to provide funding to eligible schools that participate in the federal community eligibility provision of the child nutrition programs; requiring schools that opt out of the Community Eligibility Provision of the Child Nutrition Program report their reasons for not participating; and, requiring the Governor in fiscal year 2028 and succeeding years to include $10,000,000 in the annual budget bill for the Program.  Based on our experience during the COVID-19 pandemic - when local school systems successfully delivered millions of meals to students and families under extraordinary circumstances - we are confident that all twenty-four local school systems can implement an ambitious universal meals expansion program effectively and efficiently. Maryland school systems have demonstrated both the operational capacity and commitment to ensure that no child goes hungry during the school day. Unfortunately, funding has not been available to provide this impactful opportunity for all schools.  The research on universal free meals is extensive and consistently confirms their positive impact on student achievement, both academically and behaviorally. Students who participate in school meal programs are more likely to consume nutritious foods such as fruits, vegetables, and milk, contributing to healthier eating habits and reductions in childhood obesity.  Eliminating the transaction of paying for meals also allows students more time to eat and removes stigma or administrative barriers that can discourage participation. Importantly, universal access removes the margin of error in identifying food-insecure students that often exists under traditional application-based systems. Families benefit as well; reducing the cost of providing two meals a day for children eases financial strain, particularly for working families navigating rising living costs. Research consistently demonstrates that a well-fed student is better positioned to succeed – they are more attentive in class, better prepared for assessments, and more fully engaged in the school environment. Participation in free meal programs is associated with fewer absences, improved attendance, reduced tardiness, fewer behavioral incidents, and a more positive overall school climate. While we strongly support the establishment of this program, we respectfully note that the $10 million annual appropriation will not fully meet the statewide need. Moreover, the reporting provisions in the bill will likely confirm what we already know - participation in federal CEP has lagged in Maryland, not because districts are unwilling, but because they must carefully weigh significant fiscal risks. Under the current framework, districts entering or expanding CEP must discontinue the use of traditional federal meal application forms. In the absence of a new, reliable statewide methodology for counting students in poverty - as required under the Blueprint for Maryland’s Future but not yet created by the Department - districts face uncertainty. Compensatory Education funding counts remain heavily dependent on poverty measures, and CEP calculations alone do not always capture an accurate or complete picture of need. School systems must therefore balance the benefits of universal meals against potential losses in compensatory education funding tied to incomplete data. Until Maryland adopts a consistent and reliable alternative poverty-counting methodology, participation in new CEP schools or districts will likely remain cautious. For that reason, we believe the long-term success of this legislation is closely tied to the State’s development of a more accurate and equitable method for measuring student poverty. A refined methodology would allow resources to be targeted to students and schools with the greatest need, provide local systems with the confidence to expand CEP participation, and generate more accurate data to support funding decisions. Such an approach would also assist in identifying additional community schools - a major priority under the Blueprint - and could improve the calculation and allocation of federal Title I funds at both the school and district levels. By aligning meal access, poverty measurement, and funding distribution, Maryland would advance equity in a meaningful and data-driven way. PSSAM strongly supports this legislation and the State’s commitment to expanding access to free school meals. We encourage continued attention to funding sufficiency and the development of a comprehensive poverty-counting methodology to ensure that this investment delivers maximum impact for Maryland’s students. Ensuring that students are consistently well-fed is not only a matter of compassion - it is foundational to academic success and educational equity. For these reasons, we respectfully request a favorable report on SB 586.